Cancer@Work - a nurse-led, stepped-care, e-health intervention to enhance the return to work of patients with cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Impact of a mobile health intervention based on multi-theory model of health behavior change on self-management in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Theoretical models of health behavior are important guides for disease prevention and detection, treatment and rehabilitation, and promotion and maintenance of physical and mental health, but there are no intervention studies related to differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) that use theoretical models of health as a guide. In this study, we used a microblogging platform as an intervention vehicle and mobile patient-doctor interactive health education as a means of intervention, with the aim of improving the health behaviors of DTC patients as well as the corresponding clinical outcomes.

Methods

This research project is a quantitative methodological study, and the trial will be a single-blind, single-center randomized controlled trial conducted at the Fourth Hospital of Harbin Medical University in Harbin, Heilongjiang Province. The study subjects are patients over 18 years of age with differentiated thyroid cancer who were given radioactive iodine-131 therapy as well as endocrine therapy after radical surgery for thyroid cancer. The intervention group will receive MTM-mhealth, and the realization of health education will rely on the smart terminal WeChat platform. Routine discharge education will be given to the control group at discharge. The primary outcome will be change in thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) from baseline and at 3 and 6 months of follow-up, and secondary outcomes will include change in self-management behavior, social cognitive and psychological, and metabolic control.

Discussion

This study will explore a feasible mHealth intervention program applied to a population of DTC patients using the Multi-theory model of health behavior change (MTM) as a guide, with the aim of evaluating the MTM-based intervention program for clinical outcome improvement in DTC patients, as well as determining the effectiveness of the MTM-based intervention program in improving self-management skills in DTC patients. The results of this study will indicate the feasibility as well as the effectiveness of the application of health theoretical modeling combined with mHealth applications in disease prognostic health management models, and provide policy recommendations and technological translations for the development of mobility-based health management applications in the field of health management.

M-Health in lung cancer: A literature review

The internet and digital technology have become an important resource for patients with cancer. Mobile health strategies permit patients and clinicians to interact via different tools to enrich the supplements to routine hospital visits or out-patient attendance. In this work, we have reviewed different mobile health platforms to support lung cancer patients in different areas: pre-surgery; post-surgery and on systemic treatment. We have also reviewed different digital tools used by long-term lung cancer survivors as well as the impact of these tools on the quality of life, and we tried to analyse according to literature the potential efficiency of these platforms in health system administration.

Preferred Methods of Measuring Work Participation: An International Survey Among Trialists and Cochrane Systematic Reviewers

Purpose Heterogeneity in work participation (WP) outcomes measurements hampers large scale evidence synthesis in systematic reviews of trials. In this survey we explore authors' reasons for choosing specific WP outcomes and their measurement methods, including employment status, absence from work, at-work productivity loss, and employability. Methods We contacted authors of 260 trials and 69 systematic reviews and asked closed and open-ended questions about previously used WP outcomes and measurement methods as well as their opinion on the best way to measure WP. Results In total, 91 authors from a wide range of professional backgrounds completed the survey. The majority of authors (86%) chose WP outcomes based on their use in previous similar studies. In most studies (88%), patients had not been involved in the process of selecting the WP outcome. Authors judged feasibility to be an important factor for choosing a measurement instrument (67%). Additionally, valid measurement tools should be available, easy to administer and not too time consuming. Although authors preferred registry data for long term follow-up, the availability and validity of registries was seen as a barrier. Most of the reviewers (72%) struggled to pool data because of variation in follow-up times and cut off points and varying definitions of work outcomes. Almost all (92%) respondents support the use of a Core Outcome Set for Work. Conclusions There is strong support from authors of trials and systematic reviews to develop a core outcome set on work participation outcomes for the evaluation of interventions.

The Women's Health Initiative cancer survivorship clinic incorporating electronic patient-reported outcomes: a study protocol for the Linking You to Support and Advice (LYSA) randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The improved survival rate for many cancers in high-income countries demands a coordinated multidisciplinary approach to survivorship care and service provision to ensure optimal patient outcomes and quality of life. This study assesses the feasibility of introducing a Women's Health Initiative cancer survivorship clinic in Ireland.

METHODS

The trial https://spcare.bmj.com/content/9/2/209.short comprises an intervention and control arm. Two hundred participants will be recruited. Key eligibility (1) women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast or gynecologic cancer (cervix or endometrial), within 12 months of completion of primary curative therapy, and (2) access to the Internet. The complex intervention comprises a nurse-led clinic targeting symptom management through a trigger alert system, utilizing electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) assessments at baseline, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months. It also includes input from a dietitian monitoring diet and nutritional status. The control group will receive their usual care pathway standard of care and attend the cancer survivorship clinic and complete ePRO assessments at the start and end of the study. The primary endpoint (feasibility) includes the proportion of enrolled participants who complete baseline and follow-up ePRO surveys and partake in health professional consultations after ePRO data triggers. Secondary endpoints include changes in cancer-related symptom scores assessed by ePROs, health-related Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ) scores, Appraisal Self-Care Agency-R scores, and adjuvant endocrine therapy medication adherence. A process evaluation will capture the experiences of participation in the study, and the healthcare costs will be examined as part of the economic analysis. Ethical approval was granted in December 2020, with accrual commencing in March 2021.

DISCUSSION

This protocol describes the implementation of a parallel arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) which examines the feasibility of delivering a Cancer Survivorship Clinic. The ePRO is an innovative symptom monitoring system which detects the treatment-related effects and provides individualized support for cancer survivors. The findings will provide direction for the implementation of future survivorship care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05035173 . Retrospectively registered on September 5, 2021.

Psychological and educational support for cancer patients who return to work: A scoping review

BACKGROUND: Many patients with cancer experience challenges when they return to work (RTW) following cancer diagnosis and treatment. Psycho-educational support is important to facilitate the RTW process. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review examined published reports on psycho-educational support for patients with cancer who RTW. METHODS: We followed the preferred reported items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement and the framework of Arksey and O’Malley. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database, PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO), and ICHUSHI and performed manual searches. RESULTS: We retrieved 1,586 articles and retained 48 for analysis (published January 2000 to December 2020). Physicians, occupational physicians, nurses, social workers, and psychologists provide considerable support in hospitals. Delivery modes included individual, face-to-face, and workbook. Psychological support included emotional, stress coping, counseling, and knowledge. Educational support included information or advice provision, communication skills, problem discussion, and work planning. Employment status was typically the primary outcome. We included 50 measurement scales across quality of life, cognitive functioning and illness, self-efficacy, psychological distress, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: This review elucidated psycho-educational support for patients with cancer who RTW, and measurement tools for related effects. Based on the characteristics of the psycho-educational support revealed in this study, future studies should examine the development, intervention, and implementation of support programs for patients’ RTW.

eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens

Background

Globally, the burden of cancer on population health is growing. Recent trends such as increasing survival rates have resulted in a need to adapt cancer care to ensure a good care experience and manageable expenditures. eHealth is a promising way to increase the quality of cancer care and support patients and survivors.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was 2-fold. First, we aimed to provide an overview of eHealth interventions and their characteristics for Dutch patients with and survivors of cancer. Second, we aimed to provide an overview of the empirical evidence regarding the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on population health, quality of care, and per capita costs (the Triple Aim domains).

Methods

The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane, and Ovid PsycINFO were searched using 3 key search themes: eHealth interventions, cancer care, and the Netherlands. The identified interventions were classified according to predetermined criteria describing the intervention characteristics (eg, type, function, and target population). Their impact was subsequently examined using the Triple Aim framework.

Results

A total of 38 interventions were identified. Most of these were web portals or web applications functioning to inform and self-manage, and target psychosocial factors or problems. Few interventions have been tailored to age, disease severity, or gender. The results of this study indicate that eHealth interventions could positively affect sleep quality, fatigue, and physical activity of patients with and survivors of cancer. Inconclusive results were found regarding daily functioning and quality of life, psychological complaints, and psychological adjustment to the disease.

Conclusions

eHealth can improve outcomes in the Triple Aim domains, particularly in the population health and quality of care domains. Cancer-related pain and common symptoms of active treatment were not targeted in the included interventions and should receive more attention. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on participation, accessibility, and costs. The latter can be examined in economic evaluations by comparing eHealth interventions with care as usual.

Exploration of interventions to enhance return-to-work for cancer patients: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

With the increasing incidence and earlier onset of cancer, more and more cancer patients are facing the problems of return-to-work. This review is to explore the types, contents, and results of return-to-work interventions for cancer patients.

METHODS

This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR List. Three Chinese databases and five English databases were searched from the establishment of databases to 31 March, 2021. Article selection and data extraction were conducted by two researchers.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies and 1916 cancer patients with mainly breast and gastrointestinal cancer were included. According to the contents, interventions could be divided into four types: (1) physical interventions (n = 6), including high-intensity exercise, low-to-moderate intensity exercise, yoga, and upper limb functional training, (2) psychological interventions (n = 2), including early active individualized psychosocial support and mindfulness-based recovery, (3) vocational interventions (n = 14), including making work plans, educational leaflets, vocational consultations, electronic health intervention, and interventions targeting at employers, (4) multidisciplinary interventions (n = 10), including any combination of above interventions. Physical exercises, making working plans, vocational consultations, educational leaflets, two combinations of vocational and physical interventions were validated to have positive results in enhancing cancer patients' return-to-work.

CONCLUSIONS

Return-to-work interventions for cancer patients are diversified and can be divided into physical, psychological, vocational, and multidisciplinary interventions. Medical staffs can utilize physical exercises, making working plans, vocational consultation, educational leaflets, combinations of vocational and physical interventions to enhance cancer patients' return-to-work. Other interventions still need to be developed and validated.

Is a tailored work-related support intervention feasible in everyday clinical practice? The experience of healthcare professionals and patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Work is valued as an important feature in life, however patients diagnosed with cancer can experience work-related problems. We developed a work-related support intervention to support those in need.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the performed tailored GIRONA (Gastro Intestinal cancer patients Receiving Occupational support Near and After diagnosis) intervention and to describe the experiences of those receiving the work-related support and of those providing it.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was used to survey the feasibility of the intervention of the support recipients (patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer) and the support providers (healthcare professionals including: oncology nurses and oncological occupational physicians). Five themes were covered: acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality and integration of Bowen's feasibility model.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients, 14 oncology nurses and 4 oncological occupational physicians, shared their experiences about the tailored work-related support intervention. This intervention was generally perceived as positive and feasible by the participants. Some patients received work-related support despite not experiencing severe problems; others mentioned that they received no such support even though they did need it. Despite positive experiences, there are some barriers to tackle, such as length of consultation, timing of the initiation of work-related support and embedding the oncological occupational physician within the clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

According to the healthcare professionals involved, GIRONA is feasible, however some practical barriers were mentioned. The intervention was perceived as positive by both patients and healthcare professionals, but the tailored component could be further improved to better support those in need of work-related support.

Municipal return to work management in cancer survivors: a controlled intervention study

INTRODUCTION

Resuming work during or after cancer treatment has become an important target in cancer rehabilitation.

PURPOSE

The aim was in a controlled trial to study the return to work (RTW) effect of an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention targeted to improve readiness for RTW in cancer survivors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Participants diagnosed with breast, cervix, ovary, testicular, colon-rectal, and head-and-neck cancers as well as being employed were allocated to a vocational rehabilitation intervention provided by municipal social workers (n = 83) or to usual municipal RTW management (n = 264). The intervention contained three elements: motivational communication inspired by Acceptance and Commitment Therapy by which RTW barriers were addressed, municipal cancer rehabilitation and finally employer and workplace contact. RTW effect was assessed as relative cumulative incidence proportions (RCIP) in the control and intervention group within 52 weeks of follow-up, estimated from the week where treatment ended at the hospital. RCIP was interpreted and reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for gender, age cancer diagnosis, education, comorbidity, and sick leave weeks.

RESULTS

Across cancer diagnoses 69 (83.1%) and 215 (81.4%) returned to work in the intervention and control group, respectively. No statistical effect was seen (RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.98-1.19)). Repeating the analyses solely for participants with breast cancer (n = 290) showed a significant effect of the intervention (RR 1.12 (95% CI 1.01-1.23)).

CONCLUSION

More than 80% returned to work in both groups. However, no statistical difference in RTW effect was seen across cancer diagnoses within one year from being exposed to an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention compared with usual municipal RTW management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN50753764.

Virtual care models for cancer survivorship

Virtual care models for cancer survivorship are needed to support patients living with the chronic effects of cancer treatment, while increasing health system capacity. Characteristics that may be critical to their success have not been adequately studied. This scoping review summarizes previous efforts to virtualize survivorship care to inform future innovations in the field. Four databases were searched for articles published before January 2020, and 24 articles that met selection criteria were included in this analysis. Rationale for pursuing virtual models of care shared two common objectives: (1) the need for sustainable survivorship care, and (2) the opportunity to improve survivorship outcomes. Breast cancer (N = 10) and prostate cancer (N = 4) were the most targeted cancers for virtual survivorship care. The implemented technologies included web platforms (N = 15), telephone calls (N = 12), and smartphone or tablet applications (N = 5). A variety of healthcare professionals were effectively involved in the provision of virtual care. Future virtual care models may benefit from integrating with existing health systems and services, repurposing common technologies, involving allied health professionals, and engaging patients and caregivers from diverse communities in the design of virtual services.

Return to work advice after total hip and knee replacement

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the information and advice on return to work received by patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement.

AIMS

To investigate patients' views and experiences of work-related advice provided by clinicians, and how this might be improved.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with patients who had undergone total hip and knee replacement, were working prior to surgery and intended to return to work. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients from three UK regions were consented. Eight themes were identified including lack of information, lack of an individualized approach and accessibility and acceptability of information dissemination methods. Patients identified their information needs and who they felt was best placed to address them.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receive little information and advice on return to work following total hip and knee replacement, although not all patients required this. However, more focus is needed on providing this, and patients should be screened to ensure resources are best targeted with interventions being tailored to the individual.

Return to Work Interventions for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and a Methodological Critique

Cancer patients are more at risk of being unemployed or having difficulties to return to work (RTW) compared to individuals without health concerns, and is thus a major public health issue. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and describe the interventions developed specifically to help cancer patients to RTW after treatment. Two researchers independently screened the articles for inclusion and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklists were used to assess the methodology of the included studies. Ten manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The type of studies were three quasi-experimental studies, three longitudinal studies, three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a qualitative study. RTW interventions were conducted in or outside the hospital (n = 6 and 3 respectively), or both (n = 1). Improvements in RTW were only observed in quasi-experimental studies. No improvement in RTW was noted in RCTs, nor in other measures (e.g., quality of life, fatigue). Lack of statistically significant improvement does not necessarily reflect reality, but may be attributed to non-adapted research methods. This systematic review underscores the need for researches in the RTW field to reach a consensus on RTW criteria and their assessment. Recommendations to this effect are suggested.

A cooperative support model for cancer therapy and employment balance: from focus-group interviews of health and business professionals

This study aimed to obtain a comprehensive collection of ideas and opinions from the perspective of various professionals and support providers for cancer treatment and employment balance. We performed a focus group interview, and a model diagram was created using categories created via classification of important items. The focus group interview revealed six strategies aligned with seven issues concerning the support needed to balance cancer treatment and employment. These strategies suggested the importance of not only the way of directly connecting among several specialists but also the presence and the role of the coordinators with their own specialties. Workers with cancer need supportive advices after their initial diagnosis, when returning to work, and after returning to work. After returning to work, a number of problems resulted from the lack of advice at the time of diagnosis or when returning to work. These results emphasized the necessity for the development of early comprehensive system for integrated collaboration between medical institutions, workplaces and other occupational health institutions. The results suggest that a multi-profession collaboration model is necessary to support cancer patients staying at work, which includes the cooperation between medical institutions and their counterparts from occupational health and the patients' employers.

Development of a tailored work-related support intervention for gastrointestinal cancer patients

Aim is the development of a work-related support intervention, tailored to the severity of work-related problems of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer treated with curative intent. Two methods were used: (1) Work-related problems were identified from the literature and submitted to an expert panel during a modified Delphi study. Experts allocated work-related problems into degrees of severity: mild, severe or complex. In addition, experts indicated which health care professional should provide the tailored support: (2) These outcomes were combined with existing interventions to design the tailored intervention. Semi-structured interviews with experts were conducted to assess whether the intervention was comprehensive, and feasible for daily practice. A decision diagram measuring severity of work-related problems was developed based on the modified Delphi study with 44 experts, encompassing social, disease and occupational problems. Based on the degree of severity, support was provided by: an oncological nurse (mild), oncological occupational physician (severe) or multidisciplinary team (complex). The intervention encompassed three individual meetings in the clinical setting and was considered comprehensive and feasible by 12 experts. The intervention is innovative in combining oncological and occupational care in the clinic and being tailored to the needs of GI cancer patients with specific work-related problems.

Return-to-work coordination programmes for improving return to work in workers on sick leave

BACKGROUND

To limit long-term sick leave and associated consequences, insurers, healthcare providers and employers provide programmes to facilitate disabled people's return to work. These programmes include a variety of coordinated and individualised interventions. Despite the increasing popularity of such programmes, their benefits remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review to determine the long-term effectiveness of return-to-work coordination programmes compared to usual practice in workers at risk for long-term disability.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of return-to-work coordination programmes versus usual practice for workers on sick leave or disability.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 11), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to 1 November 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled workers absent from work for at least four weeks and randomly assigned them to return-to-work coordination programmes or usual practice.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles for study eligibility; extracted data; and assessed risk of bias from eligible trials. We contacted authors for additional data where required. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and used the GRADE approach to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 studies from nine countries that enrolled 12,568 workers. Eleven studies focused on musculoskeletal problems, two on mental health and one on both. Most studies (11 of 14) followed workers 12 months or longer. Risk of bias was low in 10 and high in 4 studies, but findings were not sensitive to their exclusion.We found no benefits for return-to-work coordination programmes on return-to-work outcomes.For short-term follow-up of six months, we found no effect on time to return to work (hazard ratio (HR) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.88, low-quality evidence), cumulative sickness absence (mean difference (MD) -16.18 work days per year, 95% CI -32.42 to 0.06, moderate-quality evidence), the proportion of participants at work at end of the follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30, low-quality evidence) or on the proportion of participants who had ever returned to work, that is, regardless of whether they had remained at work until last follow-up (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.19, very low-quality evidence).For long-term follow-up of 12 months, we found no effect on time to return to work (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.66, low-quality evidence), cumulative sickness absence (MD -14.84 work days per year, 95% CI -38.56 to 8.88, low-quality evidence), the proportion of participants at work at end of the follow-up (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.15, low-quality evidence) or on the proportion of participants who had ever returned to work (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.09, moderate-quality evidence).For very long-term follow-up of longer than 12 months, we found no effect on time to return to work (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.17, low-quality evidence), cumulative sickness absence (MD 7.00 work days per year, 95% CI -15.17 to 29.17, moderate-quality evidence), the proportion of participants at work at end of the follow-up (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.07, low-quality evidence) or on the proportion of participants who had ever returned to work (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.02, low-quality evidence).We found only small benefits for return-to-work coordination programmes on patient-reported outcomes. All differences were below the minimal clinically important difference (MID).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Offering return-to-work coordination programmes for workers on sick leave for at least four weeks results in no benefits when compared to usual practice. We found no significant differences for the outcomes time to return to work, cumulative sickness absence, the proportion of participants at work at end of the follow-up or the proportion of participants who had ever returned to work at short-term, long-term or very long-term follow-up. For patient-reported outcomes, we found only marginal effects below the MID. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate across all outcomes.